cncfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:218.186.10.241
Welcome Hi, welcome to Command and Conquer Wiki. Thanks for your edit to the GDI Offense Heavy Cannon Tank page. ' '. It's an easy way to keep track of your contributions and helps you communicate with the rest of the community. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Ex Machinae (Talk) 09:33, October 24, 2009 Edits The Unit templates for the C&C IV units have lots of blank spots because the game isn't out, so of course that information isn't known. Removing those segments of the templates makes editing the articles when the new information comes in much harder. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) 15:49, October 24, 2009 (UTC) Sourcing Please do not removed sourced information like in the Mastodon article. If there is new/updated information, then sources must accompany it. - Meco (talk, ) 20:46, October 24, 2009 (UTC) General Editing Do not remove empty fields from templates. As PSH pointed out: some of this data will be revealed in the future and it would be convenient not to have to copy and paste the entire use code again from the template pages. And again, do not removed sourced information or break references, as you did in the Hunter article. Furthermore it is not necessary to add anything along these lines: "more intel will be available in the future". Please respond on this talk page to either confirm you have received and understand what is expected, or alternatively to ask for clarification if you do not understand. - Meco (talk, ) 05:23, October 25, 2009 (UTC) You cannot keep adding unsourced information. One more edit like that and you will be taking a break. Your choice. - Meco (talk, ) 05:40, October 25, 2009 (UTC) Since it does not seem to be obvious to you: when you source something, the claimed source should have the information. Note your Hurricane edit: you claimed the "Factions" page had information even though the Hurricans doesn't appear on that page yet. Do not add speculation. If something is unknown, or unconfirmed, don't add it. Also do not use phrases like "certain sources"; just say what the source says and add a refernece. And again: do '''not' remove empty fields in the template use code'', or use phrases like "more info will be available in future". It's the constant repetition of the same mistakes that is putting you on thin ice. Ask if you do not understand. - Meco (talk, ) 17:18, October 25, 2009 (UTC) Again, do not use phrases like according to official source, or certain sources. And check your reference links; many do not link directly to the articles. We are standardizing on American English, so armor not armour. Last warning: do not remove empty fields in the templates. You may have noticed by now how I keep adding them back. - Meco (talk, ) 15:49, October 26, 2009 (UTC) Profile info It is not a good idea to showhorn everything in EA's unit profile into the article for that unit. Why? Because not all of the profile info directly relates to the unit. This is a wiki, organizing the information is also part of what we do; put the right information in the right article! For example, the Mastodon article had a bunch of info the Mammoth Mk. II, info that is better placed in the Mammoth Mk. II article. This is why the Mastodon article is "missing" information from the profile, and as a result of intrawiki article linking, is far more focused. (Similarly, the Orca Mk. V has a bunch of stuff better placed in the Orca Mk. IV article and the Orca article; this has not yet been fully carried out.) Also, the "description", "history", "game unit" format, and in that order? Follow it. - Meco (talk, ) 16:38, November 10, 2009 (UTC)